ibotlog2html for #crosstool-ng

<< Previous 2012-11-20 Next >>

# 01:01:58 thewonderidiot quits : Quit: Leaving.
# 01:04:56 thewonderidiot joins #crosstool-ng
# 01:07:21 thewonderidiot quits : Client Quit
# 05:00:21 sh4rm4 y_morin, is there a way to pass CFLAGS for use by the libstdc++ compilation/configure run ? BOOT_CFLAGS doesn't seem to work
# 06:12:51 sfan5|OFF is now known as: sfan5
# 06:13:43 sfan5 is now known as: sfan5|OFF
# 06:17:31 sspiff joins #crosstool-ng
# 07:02:34 mingwandroid joins #crosstool-ng
# 07:23:44 diorcety quits : Quit: Leaving.
# 08:06:09 mingwandroid parts #crosstool-ng
# 08:18:06 mnt_real quits : Ping timeout: 264 seconds
# 08:19:07 mnt_real joins #crosstool-ng
# 08:45:03 smartin joins #crosstool-ng
# 10:34:28 braunr joins #crosstool-ng
# 10:34:34 braunr hello
# 10:34:52 braunr does someone know if 1.17.0 is really the last stable release ?
# 10:35:05 braunr it's not announced on the web site main page
# 11:18:32 Kasreyn joins #crosstool-ng
# 11:43:01 braunr also, has anyone successfully built ctng on x86_64 targetted for x86 ?
# 11:43:15 braunr i'm getting "build/src/gcc-4.7.2/libitm/config/x86/cacheline.h:55:3: error: '__m64' does not name a type"
# 12:00:07 ssspiff joins #crosstool-ng
# 12:00:57 sspiff quits : Ping timeout: 244 seconds
# 13:13:04 sfan5|OFF is now known as: sfan5
# 14:17:51 ssspiff quits : Remote host closed the connection
# 16:19:24 alan_o joins #crosstool-ng
# 16:37:36 smartin_ joins #crosstool-ng
# 16:38:20 smartin quits
# 16:38:41 smartin_ is now known as: smartin
# 17:00:15 alan_o quits : Remote host closed the connection
# 17:01:29 alan_o joins #crosstool-ng
# 17:01:36 alan_o_ joins #crosstool-ng
# 17:01:56 alan_o_ quits : Remote host closed the connection
# 17:16:26 diorcety joins #crosstool-ng
# 17:24:19 y_morin joins #crosstool-ng
# 17:26:49 braunr y_morin: hello
# 17:27:07 braunr y_morin: is it normal that 1.17.0 isn't announced on the web site ?
# 17:27:28 y_morin braunr: Hello! No, that's an oversight. I'll do it in a moment. Thank you!
# 17:28:34 braunr also, did you run into http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52695 ?
# 17:29:53 y_morin braunr: website updated, now!
# 17:31:41 y_morin braunr: nope, never saw that one.
# 17:34:11 braunr y_morin: do you sometimes build for x86 ?
# 17:35:12 thewonderidiot joins #crosstool-ng
# 17:35:14 y_morin braunr: there are at least two samples that target x86_64, and a few samples that build for i?86.
# 17:35:28 y_morin braunr: to see existing samples: ct-ng list-samples
# 17:35:32 braunr ah right
# 17:35:51 y_morin braunr: to use an existing sample: ct-ng SAMPLE_TUPLE (replace SAMPLE_TUPLE with the actual tuple, of course)
# 17:35:52 braunr i'll try with one of them and see if any custom option is responsible
# 17:36:00 braunr i assume you build from x86_64 ?
# 17:36:06 y_morin braunr: the samples are known to build
# 17:36:30 y_morin braunr: yes, my host ixs x86_64. But I also have a 32-bit chroot from where I (seldom) build.
# 17:36:37 y_morin *is
# 17:37:07 braunr ok, close enough to what i use too
# 17:37:34 y_morin braunr: if you want to build in a 32-bit chroot on a x86_64 system, you have to use setarch
# 17:37:44 braunr yes
# 17:39:06 braunr ah yes, talking to the same person with several communication channels at the same time, great :)
# 17:39:29 y_morin braunr: Hehe! :-) I was goingto poke you on #buildroot. ;-)
# 17:39:32 Kasreyn quits : Read error: Connection reset by peer
# 17:41:55 smartin quits : Quit: leaving
# 17:59:45 sh4rm4 y_morin, is there a way to pass CFLAGS for use by the libstdc++ compilation/configure run ? BOOT_CFLAGS doesn't seem to work
# 18:00:57 sh4rm4 my problem is that libstdc++'s configure doesnt use --Wl,-secure-plt
# 18:01:19 sh4rm4 that makes invalid shared binaries and will report "C compiler does not work"
# 18:01:41 sh4rm4 *-Wl,--secure-plt
# 18:28:30 smartin joins #crosstool-ng
# 18:43:18 y_morin sh4rm4: No, there's no such mechanism in ct-ng.
# 18:43:49 y_morin sh4rm4: What does -secure-plt does? Why is it needed in your case? What arch is impacted?
# 18:46:53 sh4rm4 y_morin, i mean a general gcc build mechanism
# 18:47:24 sh4rm4 secure-plt uses the non-default, but sane plt mechanism on powerpc
# 18:47:44 y_morin sh4rm4: Oh, not that I am aware of. Lemme check...
# 18:47:53 sh4rm4 the other one requires writable memory segment and do on-the-fly code generation into that
# 18:48:03 sh4rm4 so kind of like a jit
# 18:48:18 sh4rm4 of course that opens the door for all kinds of security issues
# 18:49:11 y_morin sh4rm4: OK, I understand (somewhat).
# 18:54:16 y_morin sh4rm4: What if you pass it in CT_TARGET_CFLAGS and/or CT_TARGET_LDFLAGS ?
# 18:54:59 sh4rm4 is that a CrossTool thing ?
# 18:55:51 y_morin sh4rm4: yes. For gcc, it translated to CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET (resp. LDFLAGS_FOR_TARGET) environment variables passed to ./configure
# 18:56:07 y_morin *is translated to...
# 18:56:15 sh4rm4 a nice, thx
# 18:56:19 sh4rm4 gonna try that
# 18:56:33 sh4rm4 of course building gcc in qemu takes a lot of time...
# 18:57:12 y_morin sh4rm4: I've done worse recently: build gcc in Cygwin in a Win7 machine under qemu without KVM accel... Sigh...
# 19:06:13 sh4rm4 is that slower than ppc emu ?
# 19:08:38 y_morin sh4rm4: Hmm, not sure. The POSIX emulation layer in Cygwin has a *huge* impact., notably for fork, which is horrible. So it may indeed be slower, even if the underlying arch is the same.
# 19:08:43 sh4rm4 i imagine that emulating x86 on x86 is a tad faster, since it doesnt need to translate the instructions
# 19:08:59 sh4rm4 yeah, configure runs will be slow as hell on cygwin ;)
# 19:09:53 y_morin sh4rm4: a native ./configure on my machine takes ~10s, while it takes ~1min30s inCygwin in Seven/64 under qemu.
# 19:10:36 y_morin sh4rm4: timings for make are: 12s vs. ~4min45s, and 'make install' is 3s vs. 2min30.
# 19:10:51 y_morin sh4rm4: beat that! ;-)
# 19:11:04 y_morin goes for dinner. See you guys/gals!
# 19:11:52 sfan5 is now known as: sfan5|OFF
# 19:12:04 sh4rm4 well building gcc 4.5 takes about 2 hours in qemu ppc emulation. still a lot faster than mips, that takes ~12 hours
# 21:00:10 Kasreyn joins #crosstool-ng
# 22:14:16 obiwahn quits : *.net *.split
# 22:17:48 obiwahn joins #crosstool-ng
# 22:29:59 linuxjacques quits : Remote host closed the connection
# 22:30:28 linuxjacques joins #crosstool-ng
# 22:30:52 linuxjacques is now known as: Guest95035
# 22:36:16 braunr y_morin: there is a way iirc
# 22:36:33 y_morin braunr: a way for what?
# 22:36:40 braunr 18:59 < sh4rm4> y_morin, is there a way to pass CFLAGS for use by the libstdc++ compilation/configure run ? BOOT_CFLAGS doesn't seem to work
# 22:36:52 y_morin Ah, that. OK, I'm all eyes! ;-)
# 22:37:10 braunr CT_CC_ENABLE_CXX_FLAGS
# 22:37:21 braunr i use this to build libstdc++ with debugging symbols
# 22:37:42 braunr sh4rm4: ^
# 22:37:54 y_morin braunr: the problem is not how to tell ct-ng to pass specific flags, but if those flags even exist in the first place.
# 22:38:20 braunr ah sorry, i didn't read it all, just got back
# 22:38:29 y_morin :-)
# 22:38:36 braunr i thought sh4rm4 just wanted to pass specific flags for the libstdc++ build
# 22:38:39 sh4rm4 sh4rm4: yes. For gcc, it translated to CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET (resp. LDFLAGS_FOR_TARGET) environment variables passed to ./configure
# 22:38:44 sh4rm4 braunr ^
# 22:38:47 sh4rm4 that actually worked
# 22:38:59 y_morin sh4rm4: Good to know! :-)
# 22:39:00 braunr good :)
# 22:39:35 y_morin braunr: sh4rm4: What if you pass it in CT_TARGET_CFLAGS and/or CT_TARGET_LDFLAGS ?
# 22:40:18 Guest95035 quits : Changing host
# 22:40:19 Guest95035 joins #crosstool-ng
# 22:40:32 Guest95035 is now known as: linuxjacques
# 23:07:04 thewonderidiot parts #crosstool-ng
# 23:33:03 alan_o quits : Ping timeout: 245 seconds
# 23:55:05 smartin quits : Quit: night all
# 23:59:23 y_morin quits : Quit: Nighty Night!

Generated by ibotlog2html by Yann E. MORIN